Talk:Polynomial differential form
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Too Technical and Notability
editThe article creator has removed the too technical template and notability tags instead of adequately addressing the issues as required. On the technical side, the article must be written so that a general reader has some idea of the significance, this is entirely lacking. In terms of notability, wikipedia's guidelines are clear: WP:GNG requires significant coverage in reliable sources for any subject, including mathematics subjects, to be deemed sufficiently notable for inclusion in wikipedia; discussion boards are NOT reliable sources and do nothing to indicate to general notability of the subject. Notability of this subject has not been established, since my tags were removed I have unreviewed the article, another editor can re-review.Polyamorph (talk) 09:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Polyamorph: I think the question is whether this article is fine as a stub
- On the technical side, I agree the article can use more materials on contexts; it should have for example the mention of an application. I commented out the technical template since that template isn’t quite applicable here. The template is not meant to be saying that the topic is technical; but that article is inappropriately technical and should be made less technical. To the readers with appropriate backgrounds, I don’t think the article at the current form is unduly technical.
- I removed the non-notability tag after adding a few more refs. I disagree that the discussion board cannot be used; that depends on the board. Mathoverflow is widely visited by professional mathematicians and it provides a very good method to determining the notability. Besides, the topic is discussed in major papers by well-regarded experts in the field; that’s usually enough for establishing the notability. —- Taku (talk) 22:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
- @TakuyaMurata: You make some good points. As this is a stub, which by its nature is tagged for expansion, then I agree. As you remark, any expansion will require more introductory content to give this some context / demonstrate its significance. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 05:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)